Husband challenged Family Court order granting wife Rs.10,000 per month interim maintenance. High Court found wife had no income and husband ran a tyre retreading shop with means to pay, held no illegality in the impugned order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
2025:CGHC:6273
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No. 117 of 2023
Mohd. Mujbil Khan @ Majbal Khan S/o Minhajul Khan Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Barejpara Ambikapur, Post Thana And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
Tanuja W/o Mod Mujbil Khan Aged About 37 Years D/o Abdul Kalim, R/o Ward No. 09, Mitvanagar Korea Collary Post Korea Collery, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent
For Applicant
: Mr. Pavas Sharma, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate
Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board
04/02/2025
Heard.
2
3
applicant, therefore he is not able to get the benefit of interim maintenance under the provision of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. He further contended that the learned Family Court has failed to consider that the applicant is not an owner of the tyre retreating business, but mere an worker as an employee and earning only Rs.10,000/- per month and the respondent/wife is well educated and there is no requirement for the maintenance for sustaining normal life, hence, the interim maintenance is liable to be set-aside. It is therefore, that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allowed criminal revision and set-aside impugned order dated 29.10.2022 passed by the learned Family Court and pass suitable order in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
4
husband of the respondent has to pay the said interim maintenance amount.
5
has rightly determined the amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent, therefore, in the opinion of this Court that there is no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order dated 29.10.2022 passed in Misc. Criminal Case No.78/2021 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh Camp Baikunthpur, District Korea (C.G.).
Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma)
Judge
Vasant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Family Court rightly granted the wife interim maintenance of Rs.10,000 per month under Section 125 CrPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohd. Mujbil Khan @ Majbal Khan
Tanuja
Arvind Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
